Is The Future of Web Directories Safe?

[Robocop]

With Google (Supposedly) now on the war path of ‘Paid Links’ I got thinking about directories and the effect this may have.

Having looked deeper and reading up in ‘Matt Cutts: Gadgets, Google, and SEO’ url: www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-report-paid-links/ I came across some questions/ answers about directories and on reporting paid sites and what sites in particular Google is interested in.

Anybody interested in more I’d suggest going to the url above, once open click EDIT…FIND ON THIS PAGE…then enter DIRECTORIES followed by NEXT.

Below is a small sample of questiong concerning reporting/ acting on paid links in directories. Please feel free to add your comments here.

Q: Are you interested in hearing about directories in this report?
A: Nope, I’d be most interested in feedback like the examples that I mentioned above, or things like paid posts that might affect search engines. If you’re still unsure what sort of reports we’d like to get, that’s okay. Fortunately, the vast majority of people sending in reports are on the same wavelength and are sending in solid feedback like the examples above.
Q: Hey, as long as we’re talking about directories, can you talk about the role of directories, some of whom charge for a reviewer to evaluate them?
A: I’ll try to give a few rules of thumb to think about when looking at a directory. When considering submitting to a directory, I’d ask questions like:
- Does the directory reject urls? If every url passes a review, the directory gets closer to just a list of links or a free-for-all link site.
- What is the quality of urls in the directory? Suppose a site rejects 25% of submissions, but the urls that are accepted/listed are still quite low-quality or spammy. That doesn’t speak well to the quality of the directory.
- If there is a fee, what’s the purpose of the fee? For a high-quality directory, the fee is primarily for the time/effort for someone to do a genuine evaluation of a url or site.
Those are a few factors I’d consider. If you put on your user hat and ask “Does this seem like a high-quality directory to me?” you can usually get a pretty good sense as well, or ask a few friends for their take on a particular directory.

One question on Matt Cuuts blog was:

I have submitted my site to a few paid directories am I gonna get banned coz of that
Answer from Matt Cutts:

There’s absolutely no problem with selling links for traffic (as opposed to PageRank). At http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/hidden-links/ I mention a couple ways to sell links that Google would have no problem with.

Your thoughts please........

 

[temi]

This is an excellent post Robocop, it sheds lights on some the stuff that has been going round about paid links an so forth.

 

[gkd_uk]

I think the future is bright for those who d not advertise selling links for higher PR.

 

[temi]

Yes, Google has always hated the idea of selling PR.

 

[gkd_uk]

But they may change their methods if Microsoft takes over Yahoo.

What Google don't allow, Microsoft may allow

 

[temi]

I don't think MS taking over Yahoo will have much effect on Google

 

[gkd_uk]

I think it would put Google under huge pressure.

Microsoft have the technology, they have purchased the advertising firm and then they may purchase Yahoo.

Put all the above together and it can be a good competition for Google.

 

[Robocop]

As Google are on the trail of reducing hyped PR. Next thing may well be disregarding links in forums.

I can see that coming next.

Links? what links?

 

[temi]

Maybe I have been around too long, but I don't really see Google getting on top of this problem, if the clamp down on one way, people find another way, for example, recently I have seen a significant increase in the number of reciprocal link exchange request I am getting, that is one way to get past buying link thing, I am sure there are lots of other ways.
The only solution if for google to cancel the PR thing so that the green button does not exist anymore, that way, there will be no incentive what so ever to buy or exchange links for PR.

 

[Robocop]

The only solution if for google to cancel the PR thing so that the green button does not exist anymore

Shhhhhhhhhhhh they might be listerning

 

[gkd_uk]

If they did decide to pack PR in, it would put a lot of webmasters off and also affect Google.

 

[Lovely]

If they did decide to pack PR in, it would put a lot of webmasters off and also affect Google.

Yes I agree with you, it will affect a lot of site owner's, Google and lot of webmaster we be out of job.

 

[Robocop]

On the other hand it might force webmasters to concentrate on serps more instead of increasing the size of a little green bar that Google uses to monopolise the web.

 

[temi]

Well well, look who is talking, I hope you take your own advice Robocop

 

[Robocop]

Was taught by you Master

 

[Piotrek]

I think taking down PR would have to be related with developing a new way of validating the content, popularity and usefullness of a website, which originally was backlinking. Once they do that, I think they go for it. But then again there will be people who will find a way to mislead it...

 

[Robocop]

Still on the subject of Page Rank, I came across this. What's your thoughts?

when you enable PageRank and Alexa functionality, your surfing data is sent back to Google and Amazon (Alexa's owner). Some security conscious internet users prefer not to use these tools for that reason.

 

[Piotrek]

Well... they say the data is anonymous. But then again you know how many info is being sent in each HTTP connection... Trust them or switch it of. Or switch it of when you're looking at the 'forbidden' sites ;P

 

[Robocop]

Or switch it of when you're looking at the 'forbidden' sites

I didnt think you had time for that Piotrek, be careful you will go blind